March 28, 2012
Jenny MontgomeryA snapshot of key points from bills heard in the 2012 legislative session. All enrolled acts were signed by the governor by
March 20.
More
January 18, 2012
Jenny MontgomeryThe modest filing fee could help offset declining IOLTA funds.
More
February 16, 2011
Rebecca BerfangerA number of bills with environmental impact have been introduced in both houses of the Indiana Legislature for 2011.
More
October 13, 2010
Michael HoskinsThe notion of pirates pillaging treasures and bartering it on the high seas isn’t that far fetched for Indianapolis
intellectual property attorney Jonathan Polak.
More
March 15, 2010
Michael HoskinsAs the Indiana General Assembly got down to its final hours in a short-session, significant changes for the Hoosier legal
community were on the table to possibly increase the number of appellate judges, change how one county chooses its trial judges,
and impact how juveniles can be placed outside the state.
More
March 11, 2010
Michael HoskinsVetoed legislation that would scrap St. Joseph County's merit selection for judicial elections and also add a new three-judge
panel to the Indiana Court of Appeals is back in play.
More
March 3, 2010
Michael HoskinsLawmakers have passed a bill that allows the Indiana Department of Child Services to more efficiently collect delinquent child
support, including a gaming intercept requiring casinos to check whether gamers are on a state delinquency list before releasing
large jackpots to them.
More
February 5, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe session is about halfway over, but there are still several bills making their way through the General Assembly that the
Indiana Attorney General's Office is watching.
More
February 3, 2010
Rebecca BerfangerA bill that incorporated suggestions from attendees and organizers of an Indiana State Bar Association-sponsored juvenile
justice summit last summer passed the Indiana Senate 45-3 Feb. 18.
More
January 20, 2010
Michael HoskinsLawmakers are considering legislation that would repeal a last-minute 2009 special session provision that gave the Indiana
Department of Child Services key control in deciding whether juveniles should be placed outside the state.
More
January 20, 2010
Michael HoskinsState lawmakers want to crack down on child support collections and make it tougher for deadbeat parents to not pay what's
owed.
More
January 20, 2010
Rebecca BerfangerA juvenile justice summit by the Indiana State Bar Association in August has led to the introduction of a bill that would
change how students are treated in schools and hopefully decrease the number of school suspensions while increasing statewide
graduation rates.
More
January 8, 2010
Rebecca Berfangerhe ACLU of Indiana is keeping an eye on bills that have been introduced this session and is anticipating others that could
be introduced, including those that will affect due process, First Amendment rights, reproductive rights, voting rights, Second
Amendment rights, and rights based on gender identity and sexual orientation, among other issues covered by the U.S. Constitution
and Bill of Rights.
More
February 13, 2009
Michael HoskinsIndiana lawmakers want the state's legal aid and pro bono programs to have one less hurdle to navigate through when representing
indigent clients, agreeing that there's no need to always tie up court time in establishing indigency.
More
G. Michael Witte letter states he's suspended for three years. The case that got him suspended is identical to my estate case, including havin the Late Judge Deiter recuse himself because Newman had a conflict of interest with the judge. His Modus Operandi is nearly identical.
SIGNED BY G. MICHAEL WITTE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY INDIANA SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DATED MAY 17, 2012.
Your 6th complaint against Lawrence T. Newman filed on 4/12/2012. On 1/31/12, the Indiana Supreme Court entered an order suspending Lawrence T. Newman’s law license for a period of three years. More important, even after three years, Lawrence Todd Newman will not get his license back unless and until he goes through a separate proceeding to prove that he is fit to practice law. This is not an easy process, and the burden is upon Lawrence T. Newman to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he is fit to return to practice.
Because of the length of Lawrence T. Newman’s license suspension and the fact he may never succeed in getting his law license reinstated, we are not opening an investigation file at this time.
Should Lawrence T. Newman seek reinstatement in the future, we will open your file and ask Lawrence T. Newman to address your grievance as part of his burden of proving fitness. We have attempted to notify Lawrence T. Newman that this will be required of him.
It may disappoint you to hear that we will be doing nothing on your grievance at this time. However, the most our office can ever accomplish is to take away a lawyer’s license to practice law. We have already done that, albeit as a result of misconduct in cases other than your own. It makes better sense for our office to focus its limited resources on cases where the lawyers are still actively practicing law.
Is there any justice in the Marion County Superior Court Civil Division? I am the unfortunate victim of a retaliatory lawsuit brought by Lawrence Todd Newman, the attorney from an estate case on which I worked as a unsupervised personal representative in 2006. The contract agreement for that case stated that the estate would be responsible for all attorney fees, but Newman refused to close the nearly insolvent estate when my duties were complete and his fees were paid. Instead, he tried to extort additional attorney fees from me by keeping the case open to address a wrongful death claim, despite the estate’s heir’s lack of interest in pursuing it and an expert doctor’s opinion that it would not be worth doing so. He also knowingly deceived me into believing that a “closing statement” was needed to close the estate, even though this requirement had actually been waived by the estate’s heir. The heir’s attorney filed a motion to have Newman removed from the case. After the court closed the probate case with prejudice (barred from further litigation) Newman illegally re-opened the case in another courtroom.
As a result of complaints filed against him for these and similar actions, Newman has been suspended from practicing law for 18 months by the Indiana Disciplinary Commission. In retaliation, he has filed suit against me demanding additional attorney fees for the 2006 estate case, despite the fact that I made no agreement stating that I would pay any fees from my own assets on behalf of the estate. This lawsuit violates the rules of ethics, due process of law, and equal protection of law. Newman has been allowed to file ridiculous pleadings at an alarming rate and has been supported by a biased court system. Judge Carroll refuses to recuse himself from the case despite the fact that, by his own admission, he intends to grant Newman sanctions regardless of the evidence. When my former counsel discovered that the previous judge on the case, Judge Sosin, was a long-time close friend of Newman’s family, Judge Carroll commented for the record during a hearing that Judge Sosin in so many words “he finds the door “was weak for recusing himself from the case as a result of this obvious conflict of interest.
This case is a public policy issue. Statutes put in place to protect unsupervised personal representatives in probate matters are being ignored. This case will affect thousands of individuals involved in probating and the personal representation of estates. Justice cannot possibly be served as long as a biased judge is allowed to defend a “vexatious litigant,” as Newman has been described by Judge Logan in Bradenton, Florida court. If there is any justice in the Marion County Superior Court Civil Division, this case against me will be dismissed with prejudice.
Every affront to decency and every style adopted by criminals is not per se a constituttional violation. Only fools believe or espouse that.
This was an unnecessary change in law, a needless fiddling with a tax that impacted very very few hoosiers, but one that erodes a tax base benefitting very many hoosiers. Just because some people wanted to chalk up a "tax cut" on their legislative brag-list, and didnt give a fig about replacing the revenue any other way. Really stupid. I am a republican my whole life and this just shames me like hell. I have to use a fake name over this because I know my fellow republicans are all brain washed over tax cutting too.